Macmillan MS, Wells M, MacBride S, Raab GM, Munro A, MacDougall H, et al.
International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics. Date of publication 2007 Jul 1;volume 68(3):864-72.
1. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Jul 1;68(3):864-72. Epub 2007 Mar 23.
Randomized comparison of dry dressings versus hydrogel in management of
radiation-induced moist desquamation.
Macmillan MS(1), Wells M, MacBride S, Raab GM, Munro A, MacDougall H.
Author information:
(1)Napier University, Faculty of Life Sciences, Edinburgh, UK.
m.macmillan@napier.ac.uk
Comment in
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Oct 1;69(2):638-9.
PURPOSE: We present the results of a randomized controlled clinical trial that
evaluated the effect of a hydrogel or dry dressing on the time to healing of
moist desquamation after radiotherapy to the head-and-neck, breast, or anorectal
areas.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 357 patients were randomized before
radiotherapy to receive simple dry dressings (Tricotex) or a hydrogel
(Intrasite), with Tricotex as a secondary dressing. Patients were instructed to
use their dressings from the onset of moist desquamation, if it occurred.
RESULTS: Of the 357 patients, 100 (28%) developed moist desquamation. The time to
healing was significantly prolonged (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval,
0.42-0.99), in patients assigned to gel dressings. No evidence was found that gel
dressings had a significant impact on subjectively reported skin symptoms.
CONCLUSION: The results of this study have not supported the routine use of
hydrogels in the care of patients with moist desquamation and suggests that the
healing times are prolonged, without any improvement in patient comfort.
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.12.049
PMID: 17363185 [Indexed for MEDLINE]
